From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.8 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN,FREEMAIL_FROM, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS, URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C1B38ECE58D for ; Fri, 11 Oct 2019 17:28:52 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9BFDD21D82 for ; Fri, 11 Oct 2019 17:28:52 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b="uIIO1nQy" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1728594AbfJKR2v (ORCPT ); Fri, 11 Oct 2019 13:28:51 -0400 Received: from mail-io1-f68.google.com ([209.85.166.68]:41354 "EHLO mail-io1-f68.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1728400AbfJKR2v (ORCPT ); Fri, 11 Oct 2019 13:28:51 -0400 Received: by mail-io1-f68.google.com with SMTP id n26so23111262ioj.8; Fri, 11 Oct 2019 10:28:51 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=frrCbAZAd68hKoLuiOOGlE5hHEH6QkBVxhQEVUgPYRY=; b=uIIO1nQyPQz/S9w2WtpCS/4aeSLRGaiSgqpChH+47hSJeX5nhlRWavPGULpHAFjlUx aeByzJ5MhMbRFAXZb2CEaBHoeC6C1i/7hzJDP3fl9Ay6PpKTcJzZw2Rvbqbxes+/g3BN wnRtjd2g+CW4YvDzl9rwfVbBh7Jpc5LOlaOZncK/wtnu+y5yEjAYLSPZVB+ICBrs99Z6 OQBkZEPJK6Gwwec0NB2sHlEBvbqnbxIAy98R6wpFUF0lZO9VwRsl6uRasrGfU2xWll93 7xFKDn1fuzF2s1YNBhMnEX1lRTyxxv5zQm3Gf0hhDoOkqyNF5qy9e4+vJuVzSwFD5O2z m95g== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=frrCbAZAd68hKoLuiOOGlE5hHEH6QkBVxhQEVUgPYRY=; b=IUSkSCv9cFdFuSMN7hWP2mFk3jkQEn9Wy8SPtkTDLm8zvDRiM6iZgmejFyIvxwJecz vp4oRLBeNe8PcjrRyTpIZAKyA5b2Yxbe6d1x8FYpgj/0xJI/O3NIgUMaZihD8PFCAFnj Gi3IdwujniAhhFmCA+LJgCpBe15NN1U2QxdzKjab300N5oVAbtoM2/aPX0zDUm36OJHt /hSEgtuiFGV8I1hIo07MUqPmGUY6Qsn+lbn+/95BmO5/FpBiEq+ZT+SgfoCLOmsR3iPC wH5ESwAdJ0xvbIrHzw26LeF5oOxWUkz1w8YiGAs8RlT+v+rolDILwWUE7qeZCiOWWKbt 6OVA== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAVoXooFkPW0DUJsrDekUFcFd4iwt2sqMNPVy5VjWtQLMheHJ6l7 +/aHhsHPpRm/KqIEGPNK6w25IPwjrqQetSnT0DE= X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqzJDFVnISNwP93ew14GUbMDPf0EA5Qck1Go7sdVCs+QHn0R/7V7Avw/vi26Y8PTjiyKsUKh8ZQIVe6jwF6ARuI= X-Received: by 2002:a5d:80d3:: with SMTP id h19mr701429ior.156.1570814930427; Fri, 11 Oct 2019 10:28:50 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20191011031318.388493-1-andriin@fb.com> <20191011031318.388493-3-andriin@fb.com> <20191011162117.ckleov43b5piuzvb@kafai-mbp.dhcp.thefacebook.com> In-Reply-To: <20191011162117.ckleov43b5piuzvb@kafai-mbp.dhcp.thefacebook.com> From: Andrii Nakryiko Date: Fri, 11 Oct 2019 10:28:39 -0700 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [Potential Spoof] [PATCH bpf-next 2/2] selftests/bpf: remove obsolete pahole/BTF support detection To: Martin Lau Cc: Andrii Nakryiko , "bpf@vger.kernel.org" , "netdev@vger.kernel.org" , Alexei Starovoitov , "daniel@iogearbox.net" , Kernel Team Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: netdev@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Oct 11, 2019 at 9:21 AM Martin Lau wrote: > > On Thu, Oct 10, 2019 at 08:13:18PM -0700, Andrii Nakryiko wrote: > > Given lots of selftests won't work without recent enough Clang/LLVM that > > fully supports BTF, there is no point in maintaining outdated BTF > > support detection and fall-back to pahole logic. Just assume we have > > everything we need. > May be an error message to tell which llvm is needed? Not sure where we'd want this to be checked/printed. We don't do this today, so what I'm doing here is not really a regression. There is no single llvm version I'd want to pin down. For most tests LLVM w/ basic BTF support would be enough, for CO-RE stuff we need the latest Clang 10 (not yet released officially), though. So essentially the stance right now is that you need latest Clang built from sources to have all the tests compiled and I don't think it's easy to check for that. > > $(CPU) and $(PROBE) are no longer needed also? Good catch, removing them as well.